Toward practical measures of complexity in real-time modeling methods

Association for Information Systems - 11th Americas Conference on Information Systems, AMCIS 2005: A Conference on a Human Scale

Volumn 7, Issue , 2005, Pages 3516-3523

  Erickson, John ^a   Siau, Keng ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA AT OMAHA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA LINCOLN   (United States)

Author keywords

Complexity; Complexity metrics; Delphi study; Modeling method metrics; Real time systems; UML

Indexed keywords

COMPLEXITY; COMPLEXITY ANALYSIS; COMPLEXITY METRICS; DELPHI STUDY; MODELING TECHNIQUE; PRACTICAL MEASURES; REAL TIME MODELING; SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT; UML;

COMPUTATIONAL COMPLEXITY; INFORMATION SYSTEMS; INTERACTIVE COMPUTER SYSTEMS;

REAL TIME SYSTEMS;

EID: 84869814666     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (16)

1. Anderson, J., and Lebiere, C. (1998) The Atomic Components of Thought, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
2. Briand, L., Wüst, J., and Lounis, H. (1999c). "A Comprehensive Investigation of Quality Factors in Object-Oriented Designs: An Industrial Case Study." 21st International Conference on software Engineering. Los Angeles, CA. pp 345-354.
3. Dobing, B. and Parsons, J. (2000). Understanding the Role of Use Cases in UML: A Review and Research Agenda. Journal of Database Management. Vol. 11. No. 4. pp. 28-36.
4. Douglass, B. 2000. Real-Time UML Second Edition: Developing Efficient Objects for Embedded Systems, Addison-Wesley.
5. Erickson, J. and Siau, K. (2004) Theoretical and Practical Complexity of Unified Modeling Language: Delphi Study and Metrics Analyses. International Conference on Information Systems. Washington, DC. December.
6. Erickson, J. and Siau, K. (2003). Unified Modeling Language? The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly. in: Toppi, H., Brown, C. (eds.). IS Management Handbook. Auerbach.
7. Fenton, N. and Pfleeger, S. (1997). Software Metrics A Rigorous and Practical Approach. PWS Publishing. pp. 243-278.
8. Kobryn, C. (2002). "What to Expect from UML 2.0". SD Times. [Online]. Available: http://www.sdtimes.com/opinions/guestview_048.htm.
9. Ludwig, B. (1997). "Predicting the Future: Have you considered using the Delphi Methodology?" Extension Journal. October. Vol. 35. No. 5.
10. OMG (Object Management Group) Web site. (2005). [Online]. Available: [http://www.omg.org/gettingstarted/what_isuml.htm.
11. Miller, G. (1956). "The Magical Number Seven, Plus or Minus Two: Some Limits on Our Capacity for Processing Information." The Psychological Review. Vol. 63. No. 2.
12. Rossi, M. and Brinkkemper, S. (1996). "Complexity Metrics for Systems Development Methods and Techniques." Information System., Vol. 21. No. 2. pp. 209-227.
13. Siau, K., and Cao, Q. (2001). "Unified Modeling Language (UML) - A Complexity Analysis." Journal of Database Management. Vol. 12. No. 1. 26-34.
14. Siau, K., Erickson, J., and Lee, L. (2002) "Complexity of UML: Theoretical versus Practical Complexity." Workshop on Information Technology and Systems (WITS). Barcelona, Spain, December 16-18.
15. Weyuker, E. (1988) "Evaluating Software Complexity Measures." IEEE Computer. 0098-5589/88-1357.
16. Zendler, A., Pfeiffer, T., Eicks, M., and Lehner, F. (2001) "Experimental Comparison of Coarse Grained Concepts in UML, OML and TOS." Journal of Systems and Software. Vol. 57. pp 21-30.